Page 1 of 2
#1
Hey guys

I'm bored of writing my own music so I was wondering if you could help me. I've been listening to stuff like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fffHfyie9tw

and I know it's made up of Brian Eno samples but I can't find anything cool to use so i was hoping maybe you guys would have some ideas about who's music to steal? Also, making up drumbeats just seems really long winded and pointless when there's loads of loops around - do any of you know where i could get some?
#2
I would recommend sampling the drum beat from Synthetic Substitution over any of Chopin's nocturnes, and then adding various nature sounds, such as streams, animals, rain, and wind. This would create a very unique sound that I think many people would enjoy.

Good luck with your music.
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#3
Quote by willT08
Hey guys

I'm bored of writing my own music so I was wondering if you could help me. I've been listening to stuff like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fffHfyie9tw

and I know it's made up of Brian Eno samples but I can't find anything cool to use so i was hoping maybe you guys would have some ideas about who's music to steal? Also, making up drumbeats just seems really long winded and pointless when there's loads of loops around - do any of you know where i could get some?



LOL, nice troll attempt.

#6
Quote by Elintasokas
That's all he does. Almost every single one of his posts is trolling in some way.

i'm encouraging discussion about important things for a change
#7
Quote by willT08
i'm encouraging discussion about important things for a change

If you're all about change and innovation(as your hate of traditional theory suggests), etc, why do you encourage recycling old material by means of sampling. Don't you think making things from scratch has higher changes of being truly ORIGINAL?
#8
Quote by Elintasokas
If you're all about change and innovation(as your hate of traditional theory suggests), etc, why do you encourage recycling old material by means of sampling. Don't you think making things from scratch has higher changes of being truly ORIGINAL?

Here are two great songs, that are completely original, that use sampling techniques.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUecUKa_yqo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QAqJAfBjN8

Both songs are unique and original, and yet could not be possible without sampling.
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#11
Regardless of if the OP was posed in a troll-y way, this is still a discussion worth having, because it constantly gets brought up, and this is the musician talk forum.
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#12
See you guys, it's not really trolling. His sincere opinion towards sampling has spurred further discussion towards important aspects of musical innovation that have been neglected by this forum.

Quote by Elintasokas
If you're all about change and innovation(as your hate of traditional theory suggests), etc, why do you encourage recycling old material by means of sampling. Don't you think making things from scratch has higher changes of being truly ORIGINAL?


Not necessarily. Playing an E chord on a guitar really does not have any different effect than sampling an E chord played on a guitar. It can be beneficial to sample instead considering the endless compositional possibilities of sampling technology.

Obligatory example of original music made through sampling that we're all familiar with: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpCVdBe5uJo
#13
Quote by willT08
you don't need to quote the whole OP

i've been thinking about stealing this, how do i do this with theory?



also if i do will my song be legitimate?

Alva Noto


The interesting thing about this debate to me is the joke I posted in the other thread that went ignored. But basically, in the classical world, you do this and it's called quotation and you're a brilliant postmodernist. For some reason when you do this with pop music you're a hack.
#14
Quote by jazz_rock_feel
Alva Noto


The interesting thing about this debate to me is the joke I posted in the other thread that went ignored. But basically, in the classical world, you do this and it's called quotation and you're a brilliant postmodernist. For some reason when you do this with pop music you're a hack.


I noticed but I didn't have anything to add.

I appreciate you.
#15
DJ culture was the first artistic avante-garde within popular music that ‘recodes modern
technology’ (Poschardt 1998: 358)
#18
Turntablists are great because they double as samplers and percussionists (for lack of a better word).

What do all the anti-sampling people in this thread think of a nice DJ scratching solo?

Also wow, look at all these illegitimate musicians being hacks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_quotation
Last edited by slipknot5678 at Jul 21, 2014,
#21
Quote by sickman411
Who are "all the anti-sampling people in this thread" though?

Munky and Elidukakis
#22
Like for real I haven't posted anything here on a whim. I watch you lot post and when I see something I think isn't very good or needs challenging I make a sarcastic thread to get you all talking to me
#23
Quote by willT08
well even i think they're bloody awful


I like them in hip-hop sometimes as long as they aren't 'cheap'-sounding, grating, and only if they add energy to the song.

But the reason I bring it up is that they are sampling but it's still kind of like playing a real instrument when they do that. So are hitting the pads on an MPC, playing a MIDI keyboard with samples loaded into them, etc. So maybe the anti-sampling people can realise that it's not just taking someone else's song.

Even if you're just arranging samples in a DAW you're making new music of course. This isn't really directed at anyone in particular, I'm just restating my opinion that sampling can bring out new, original music in a way that can't be done any other way, practically speaking.
Last edited by slipknot5678 at Jul 21, 2014,
#24
Quote by willT08
Munky and Elidukakis

I'm not really against sampling. It's fine in my books as long as the source material can't be (easily) recognized from the new track.

If you sample an entire melody or even 50% of a melody and leave it unchanged, that's plagiarism imo.
Last edited by Elintasokas at Jul 21, 2014,
#25
Quote by Elintasokas
I'm not really against sampling. It's fine in my books as long as the source material can't be (easily) recognized from the new track.

If you sample an entire melody or even 50% of a melody and leave it unchanged, that's plagiarism imo.

why?

i'm sure you don't say that every 4 chord progression that starts C-G is plagiarism

edit: and why shouldn't it be recognizable? sometimes the point of sampling is to reference
#26
Quote by willT08
why?

i'm sure you don't say that every 4 chord progression that starts C-G is plagiarism

edit: and why shouldn't it be recognizable? sometimes the point of sampling is to reference


Yeah, it's not so different from allusions in literature.

Often times a direct sample (no reason to hide it) adds new meaning that wouldn't be there otherwise. /boringIagreepost
#27
Quote by willT08
why?

i'm sure you don't say that every 4 chord progression that starts C-G is plagiarism

edit: and why shouldn't it be recognizable? sometimes the point of sampling is to reference

Sure, with the author's permission it's fine.

And yes, I realize chord progressions can't be copyrighted. That's why I said MELODY.
#28
people don't own their music any more it's not practical

if chords can't be copyrighted why can melodies
#29
Quote by willT08
people don't own their music any more it's not practical

if chords can't be copyrighted why can melodies

If you knew music theory you wouldn't even need to ask such a question. Go learn it and you will see for yourself.
#31
Quote by willT08
lol

come on just tell me

The chances to make a unique chord progression that sounds good is much less than making a unique melody. In tonal music, chords usually only go to a few places while in a melody your possibilities are nearly infinite. There are thousands of songs that go I - IV - V for example, but you see the same melodies way less frequently.
#33
Quote by Elintasokas
The chances to make a unique chord progression that sounds good is much less than making a unique melody. In tonal music, chords usually only go to a few places while in a melody your possibilities are nearly infinite. There are thousands of songs that go I - IV - V for example, but you see the same melodies way less frequently.

**** me

that literally makes no sense. people can't own strings of notes no matter how many possible combinations supposedly sound good in western tonal music how is that even a case?

Look mate! I've already done E-G-A-F-C! YOU CAN STILL GO E-G-D-F-C

STOP STEALING FROM ME

what about the same melody played over different chords
#34
Quote by Elintasokas
The chances to make a unique chord progression that sounds good is much less than making a unique melody. In tonal music, chords usually only go to a few places while in a melody your possibilities are nearly infinite. There are thousands of songs that go I - IV - V for example, but you see the same melodies way less frequently.



your never going to convince him. He doesn't even have a point really. He's just trying to keep an argument going. I think they refer to that as TROLLING.
#35
Quote by GuitarMunky
your never going to convince him. He doesn't even have a point really. He's just trying to keep an argument going. I think they refer to that as TROLLING.

I have many points

1. Sampling in any form is a legitimate method of making music
2. There is no such thing as an illegitimate method of making music
3. Ownership of music is farcical
4. Copyrighting anything to do with music is absolute bollocks
#36
Quote by willT08
I have many points

1. Sampling in any form is a legitimate method of making music
2. There is no such thing as an illegitimate method of making music
3. Ownership of music is farcical
4. Copyrighting anything to do with music is absolute bollocks

Then you might as well say copyright anything to do with anything is bollocks.

**** the authors. Don't respect anyone. Just take someone else's work and call it your own. That's fine. Import the song into your DAW and add a reverb to it. Then promote it better than the original author and it's yours. No one will ever know someone else created it!
#37
If i've added a reverb to it i've completely changed it what's wrong with that? Spatial context is very important in music

authors don't matter any more i'm sure we've talked about this before. it's the future baby, join in
#38
Quote by Elintasokas
Then you might as well say copyright anything to do with anything is bollocks.


probably, yeah
i don't know why i feel so dry
#39
Quote by Elintasokas
Then you might as well say copyright anything to do with anything is bollocks.

**** the authors. Don't respect anyone. Just take someone else's work and call it your own. That's fine. Import the song into your DAW and add a reverb to it. Then promote it better than the original author and it's yours. No one will ever know someone else created it!


Copyright and intellectual property in a looser sense are not the same thing. Excluding a few exceptions where there have been serious copyright cases, samplers basically always acknowledge where their samples came from. There is nothing to hide. As mentioned previously, sampling is often times more of a tribute than anything.

And importing a song into your DAW and adding reverb is probably not tasteful sampling.

As I said before, I don't completely agree that the author is useless but the way we see it now (especially when joined by current copyright laws and the mindset displayed in this thread) is a very limited view.
Last edited by slipknot5678 at Jul 21, 2014,
#40
Is having an open economy of music where anything is fair game to be stolen, reused and repurposed a bad thing?

Quote by WillT08
2. There is no such thing as an illegitimate method of making music


I think it all boils down to this.
Page 1 of 2